5 Laws Everybody In Asbestos Litigation Defense Should Be Aware Of
Asbestos Litigation Defense
Protecting companies from asbestos litigation requires a thorough review of the plaintiff's employment history, medical records and testimony. We typically use the bare metal defense, which is focused on proving that your company did not make or sell the asbestos-containing products at issue in the claimant's case.
Asbestos cases are distinct and require a determined strategy to achieve success. We are local counsel, regional and national.
Statute of Limitations
The statute of limitations is a period within which most lawsuits must be filed. In asbestos cases, that means the legal deadline for filing is between one and six years after a person becomes diagnosed with an asbestos-related condition. It is crucial for the defense to prove that the alleged injury occurred after the deadline. In most cases, this involves reviewing the entirety of the plaintiff's past work history, which includes interviews with former coworkers and the careful review of Social Security, union, tax and other documents.
Defending an asbestos case involves a number of complex issues. Asbestos victims may suffer from a less severe illness, such as asbestosis, before they are diagnosed with a fatal illness such as mesothelioma. In these instances the attorney representing the defense will argue the limitation period should start when the victim knew or should have reasonably believed that exposure to asbestos caused the disease.
The complexity of these cases is made more difficult by the fact that the statute of limitations may vary between states. In these instances, an experienced mesothelioma lawyer will attempt to bring the case in the state where the bulk of the exposure alleged occurred. This could be a challenging task because asbestos victims frequently moved around the country to find work, and the alleged exposure could have occurred in multiple states.
The process of establishing the facts can be a challenge in asbestos litigation. In contrast to other personal injury cases, which often have only a handful of defendants, asbestos-related litigation typically involves a number of defendants. It can be difficult to get relevant evidence in these cases, especially when the plaintiff's argument for injuries spans decades and connects several different defendants.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team has extensive experience as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-district and multi-jurisdictional asbestos litigation. We collaborate closely with local and regional counsel to develop a strategy for litigation and manage local counsel to obtain consistent, cost-effective outcomes in line with client objectives. We regularly appear before coordinating and trial judge, as well as litigation masters, across the nation.
Bare Metal Defense
In the past, makers of boilers, turbines pumps and valves have defended themselves against asbestos lawsuits using what is referred to as "bare metal" doctrine or the component part doctrine. This defense argues that a company cannot be held responsible for asbestos-related harms caused by replacement components that the company didn't design or install.
In the case Devries v. Tennessee Eastman Chemical, the Tennessee Eastman Chemical plant employee sued several equipment manufacturers over his mesothelioma. The plaintiff's duties included the removal and replacement insulation, steam traps and gaskets from equipment like valves, pumps, and steam traps. He claimed he was exposed asbestos during his work in the plant and was diagnosed with Mesothelioma many years afterward.
The Supreme Court's decision in Devries has shifted the landscape of asbestos litigation. It could affect how courts in other jurisdictions deal with the issue of liability for third-party components that are incorporated to equipment by manufacturers. The Court declared that the application of the bare metal defense is "cabined" in maritime law but left open the possibility for other federal circuits to apply this doctrine to cases that are not maritime.
This was the first time that a federal appeals court applied the bare metal defense in a lawsuit involving asbestos, and is a significant departure from traditional product liability law. Most courts have interpreted "bare metal" as a rejection of the responsibility of a maker to warn about the dangers posed by replacement parts it did't manufacture or sale.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team regularly serves as National Coordinating Counsel for clients who are involved in multi-jurisdictional asbestos litigation. We assist our clients to develop strategies for litigation, manage regional and local counsel, and achieve an effective, cost-effective and consistent defense in coordination with their goals. Our attorneys speak at industry conferences on important issues affecting asbestos litigation. Our firm has experience in defending clients across the 50 states and working closely with trial courts, coordinating judges and special masters of litigation. Our unique strategy has proven successful in reducing exposure and legal spend for our clients.
Expert Witnesses
An expert witness is one who is specialized in his expertise, knowledge or experience and offers independent assistance to the court by way of an objective opinion regarding matters within his field of expertise. He should clearly state the facts or assumptions upon the basis of his opinion and should not omit to consider matters which could affect his opinions.
In cases involving allegations of exposure to asbestos, medical experts are often asked to assist in the evaluation of the claimant's illness and the identification of any connection between their condition and a known source of exposure. Many of the diseases that are caused by asbestos are complicated and require the expertise of specialists. This could include doctors and nurses, pharmacists, toxicologists or epidemiologists, occupational health specialists and pharmacists.
Experts are there to provide an impartial technical support, whether they are representing the prosecution or the defense. He should not assume the role of advocate and should not try to influence or persuade the jury to support his client. The obligation to the court is greater than his obligations to his client. Lynwood asbestos lawsuit should not try to push an argument or seek evidence to justify it.
The expert should work with the other experts to resolve any issues that are peripheral and narrow down any technical issues. The expert should also co-operate with the people who instruct him in identifying areas of agreement and disagreement for the purpose of the joint statement of experts ordered by the court.
The expert should, at the end of his examination chief, explain his conclusions and the reasons for them in a way that is clear and easy to comprehend. He should be ready to answer questions from either the judge or the prosecution, and be willing to address all points that are raised during cross-examination.
Cetrulo LLP has extensive experience in defending clients involved in complex asbestos litigation involving multiple parties and jurisdictions. Our lawyers are able to assist and advise national and regional defense counsel, as along with local regional, expert witnesses and experts. Our team regularly appears before trial judges, coordinating judges, and special masters in asbestos litigation throughout the country.
Medical Experts
Due to the issues of latency that occur between asbestos exposure and the beginning of symptoms Expert witnesses are a crucial part in any case involving an asbestos-related injury. Asbestos cases frequently involve complex theories of injury that stretch for decades and connect dozens or even hundreds of defendants. Because of this, it is almost impossible for a plaintiff to establish their case without the assistance of experts.
Medical and other scientists are necessary to assess the extent of a claimant's exposure, assess their medical conditions and offer insight into the possibility of future health issues. These experts are vital to any case, and must be thoroughly checked and knowledgeable in the relevant field. The more experience an scientist or doctor has the more convincing he is.
Asbestos cases usually require a medical or scientific expert to review the medical records of the plaintiff and conduct a physical examination. Experts can determine if asbestos exposure caused a specific medical condition, for example, mesothelioma or lung cancer.
It is possible to seek out other experts, such as industrial hygienists, in order to determine the presence of asbestos exposure levels. They can use advanced analytical and sampling methods to compare airborne asbestos levels at the workplace or at home with the standards for exposure that are legally required.
These experts can be useful in defending companies that produce or distribute asbestos-related products. They are usually in a position to prove that the levels of exposure for plaintiffs were below the legal limits, and that there was not evidence of negligence on the part of the employer or manufacturer liability for the product.
Other experts in these instances include environmental and occupational specialists who can offer insights into the adequacy of safety procedures at a particular work site or company and how these protocols are related to the liability of asbestos manufacturers. For instance, they can establish that renovation materials disturbed during a remodel project are more likely to contain asbestos or shaking out clothing contaminated with asbestos can cause asbestos fibers to release and become inhaled.